The Promise and Pitfalls of Using Imprecise School Accountability Measures

In recent years, most states have constructed elaborate accountability systems using school-level test scores. However, because the median elementary school contains only 69 children per grade level, such measures are quite imprecise. We evaluate the implications for school accountability systems. F...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:The Journal of economic perspectives 2002-10, Vol.16 (4), p.91-114
Hauptverfasser: Kane, Thomas J., Staiger, Douglas O.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 114
container_issue 4
container_start_page 91
container_title The Journal of economic perspectives
container_volume 16
creator Kane, Thomas J.
Staiger, Douglas O.
description In recent years, most states have constructed elaborate accountability systems using school-level test scores. However, because the median elementary school contains only 69 children per grade level, such measures are quite imprecise. We evaluate the implications for school accountability systems. For instance, rewards or sanctions for schools with scores at either extreme primarily affect small schools and provide weak incentives to large ones. Nevertheless, we conclude that accountability systems may be worthwhile. Even in states with aggressive financial incentives, the marginal reward to schools for raising student performance is a small fraction of the potential labor market value for students.
doi_str_mv 10.1257/089533002320950993
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>jstor_proqu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_39236591</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><jstor_id>3216916</jstor_id><sourcerecordid>3216916</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c430t-2cf68f04d2f1f913402e1a00dca3183aa59ba8d972660976a2a0387e7d9c5b3a3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNplkD1PwzAQhi0EEqXwBxCDxcAWOPtixx6rio-iIirRzpHrODRVGhc7GfrvSVTEALfccM_z6vQScs3gnnGRPYDSAhGAIwctQGs8ISOm0zTJtBSnZDQASU_oc3IR4xaGkWJEXpcbRxfB76roqGkKuqja0tR1pL6kq1g1n3S22wdnh_uH3Xhf04m1vmtas67qqj3QN2diF1y8JGe9Gd3Vzx6T1dPjcvqSzN-fZ9PJPLEpQptwW0pVQlrwkpWaYQrcMQNQWINMoTFCr40qdMalBJ1Jww2gylxWaCvWaHBM7o65--C_OhfbvH_euro2jfNdzFFzlKJPHpPbP-DWd6Hpf8s546CUEqqH-BGywccYXJnvQ7Uz4ZAzyIdu8__d9tLNUdrG1odfAzmTmkn8Biefc_A</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>212088858</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>The Promise and Pitfalls of Using Imprecise School Accountability Measures</title><source>Jstor Complete Legacy</source><source>Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals</source><source>Business Source Complete</source><source>American Economic Association Web</source><creator>Kane, Thomas J. ; Staiger, Douglas O.</creator><creatorcontrib>Kane, Thomas J. ; Staiger, Douglas O.</creatorcontrib><description>In recent years, most states have constructed elaborate accountability systems using school-level test scores. However, because the median elementary school contains only 69 children per grade level, such measures are quite imprecise. We evaluate the implications for school accountability systems. For instance, rewards or sanctions for schools with scores at either extreme primarily affect small schools and provide weak incentives to large ones. Nevertheless, we conclude that accountability systems may be worthwhile. Even in states with aggressive financial incentives, the marginal reward to schools for raising student performance is a small fraction of the potential labor market value for students.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0895-3309</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1944-7965</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1257/089533002320950993</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Nashville: American Economic Association</publisher><subject>Academic achievement ; Accountability ; Achievement tests ; Awards &amp; honors ; Economic sanctions ; Economic theory ; Economics ; Education systems ; Elementary schools ; Incentives ; Low income groups ; Mathematical aptitude ; Mathematics tests ; Monetary incentives ; No Child Left Behind Act 2001-US ; Performance evaluation ; Public schools ; Sanctions ; Schools ; Small schools ; Standard deviation ; Statistical variance ; Students ; Test scores ; U.S.A</subject><ispartof>The Journal of economic perspectives, 2002-10, Vol.16 (4), p.91-114</ispartof><rights>Copyright 2002 American Economic Association</rights><rights>Copyright American Economic Association Fall 2002</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c430t-2cf68f04d2f1f913402e1a00dca3183aa59ba8d972660976a2a0387e7d9c5b3a3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c430t-2cf68f04d2f1f913402e1a00dca3183aa59ba8d972660976a2a0387e7d9c5b3a3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/3216916$$EPDF$$P50$$Gjstor$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/3216916$$EHTML$$P50$$Gjstor$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,799,3735,27901,27902,57992,58225</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Kane, Thomas J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Staiger, Douglas O.</creatorcontrib><title>The Promise and Pitfalls of Using Imprecise School Accountability Measures</title><title>The Journal of economic perspectives</title><description>In recent years, most states have constructed elaborate accountability systems using school-level test scores. However, because the median elementary school contains only 69 children per grade level, such measures are quite imprecise. We evaluate the implications for school accountability systems. For instance, rewards or sanctions for schools with scores at either extreme primarily affect small schools and provide weak incentives to large ones. Nevertheless, we conclude that accountability systems may be worthwhile. Even in states with aggressive financial incentives, the marginal reward to schools for raising student performance is a small fraction of the potential labor market value for students.</description><subject>Academic achievement</subject><subject>Accountability</subject><subject>Achievement tests</subject><subject>Awards &amp; honors</subject><subject>Economic sanctions</subject><subject>Economic theory</subject><subject>Economics</subject><subject>Education systems</subject><subject>Elementary schools</subject><subject>Incentives</subject><subject>Low income groups</subject><subject>Mathematical aptitude</subject><subject>Mathematics tests</subject><subject>Monetary incentives</subject><subject>No Child Left Behind Act 2001-US</subject><subject>Performance evaluation</subject><subject>Public schools</subject><subject>Sanctions</subject><subject>Schools</subject><subject>Small schools</subject><subject>Standard deviation</subject><subject>Statistical variance</subject><subject>Students</subject><subject>Test scores</subject><subject>U.S.A</subject><issn>0895-3309</issn><issn>1944-7965</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2002</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>JFNAL</sourceid><sourceid>8G5</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>GUQSH</sourceid><sourceid>M2O</sourceid><recordid>eNplkD1PwzAQhi0EEqXwBxCDxcAWOPtixx6rio-iIirRzpHrODRVGhc7GfrvSVTEALfccM_z6vQScs3gnnGRPYDSAhGAIwctQGs8ISOm0zTJtBSnZDQASU_oc3IR4xaGkWJEXpcbRxfB76roqGkKuqja0tR1pL6kq1g1n3S22wdnh_uH3Xhf04m1vmtas67qqj3QN2diF1y8JGe9Gd3Vzx6T1dPjcvqSzN-fZ9PJPLEpQptwW0pVQlrwkpWaYQrcMQNQWINMoTFCr40qdMalBJ1Jww2gylxWaCvWaHBM7o65--C_OhfbvH_euro2jfNdzFFzlKJPHpPbP-DWd6Hpf8s546CUEqqH-BGywccYXJnvQ7Uz4ZAzyIdu8__d9tLNUdrG1odfAzmTmkn8Biefc_A</recordid><startdate>20021001</startdate><enddate>20021001</enddate><creator>Kane, Thomas J.</creator><creator>Staiger, Douglas O.</creator><general>American Economic Association</general><scope>JFNAL</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>0-V</scope><scope>0U~</scope><scope>1-H</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7WY</scope><scope>7WZ</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>87Z</scope><scope>88C</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>88J</scope><scope>8BJ</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8FL</scope><scope>8G5</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ALSLI</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BEZIV</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FQK</scope><scope>FRNLG</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>F~G</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>GUQSH</scope><scope>JBE</scope><scope>K60</scope><scope>K6~</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>L.-</scope><scope>L.0</scope><scope>M0C</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M0T</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M2O</scope><scope>M2R</scope><scope>MBDVC</scope><scope>PQBIZ</scope><scope>PQBZA</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>Q9U</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20021001</creationdate><title>The Promise and Pitfalls of Using Imprecise School Accountability Measures</title><author>Kane, Thomas J. ; Staiger, Douglas O.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c430t-2cf68f04d2f1f913402e1a00dca3183aa59ba8d972660976a2a0387e7d9c5b3a3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2002</creationdate><topic>Academic achievement</topic><topic>Accountability</topic><topic>Achievement tests</topic><topic>Awards &amp; honors</topic><topic>Economic sanctions</topic><topic>Economic theory</topic><topic>Economics</topic><topic>Education systems</topic><topic>Elementary schools</topic><topic>Incentives</topic><topic>Low income groups</topic><topic>Mathematical aptitude</topic><topic>Mathematics tests</topic><topic>Monetary incentives</topic><topic>No Child Left Behind Act 2001-US</topic><topic>Performance evaluation</topic><topic>Public schools</topic><topic>Sanctions</topic><topic>Schools</topic><topic>Small schools</topic><topic>Standard deviation</topic><topic>Statistical variance</topic><topic>Students</topic><topic>Test scores</topic><topic>U.S.A</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Kane, Thomas J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Staiger, Douglas O.</creatorcontrib><collection>Jstor Journals Open Access</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Social Sciences Premium Collection</collection><collection>Global News &amp; ABI/Inform Professional</collection><collection>Trade PRO</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Collection</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (PDF only)</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Healthcare Administration Database (Alumni)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Social Science Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS)</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Research Library (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Social Science Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Business Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>Business Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (Corporate)</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Research Library Prep</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>ProQuest Business Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Business Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Health &amp; Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Professional Advanced</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Professional Standard</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Healthcare Administration Database</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>Research Library</collection><collection>Social Science Database</collection><collection>Research Library (Corporate)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Business</collection><collection>ProQuest One Business (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><jtitle>The Journal of economic perspectives</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Kane, Thomas J.</au><au>Staiger, Douglas O.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>The Promise and Pitfalls of Using Imprecise School Accountability Measures</atitle><jtitle>The Journal of economic perspectives</jtitle><date>2002-10-01</date><risdate>2002</risdate><volume>16</volume><issue>4</issue><spage>91</spage><epage>114</epage><pages>91-114</pages><issn>0895-3309</issn><eissn>1944-7965</eissn><abstract>In recent years, most states have constructed elaborate accountability systems using school-level test scores. However, because the median elementary school contains only 69 children per grade level, such measures are quite imprecise. We evaluate the implications for school accountability systems. For instance, rewards or sanctions for schools with scores at either extreme primarily affect small schools and provide weak incentives to large ones. Nevertheless, we conclude that accountability systems may be worthwhile. Even in states with aggressive financial incentives, the marginal reward to schools for raising student performance is a small fraction of the potential labor market value for students.</abstract><cop>Nashville</cop><pub>American Economic Association</pub><doi>10.1257/089533002320950993</doi><tpages>24</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0895-3309
ispartof The Journal of economic perspectives, 2002-10, Vol.16 (4), p.91-114
issn 0895-3309
1944-7965
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_39236591
source Jstor Complete Legacy; Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals; Business Source Complete; American Economic Association Web
subjects Academic achievement
Accountability
Achievement tests
Awards & honors
Economic sanctions
Economic theory
Economics
Education systems
Elementary schools
Incentives
Low income groups
Mathematical aptitude
Mathematics tests
Monetary incentives
No Child Left Behind Act 2001-US
Performance evaluation
Public schools
Sanctions
Schools
Small schools
Standard deviation
Statistical variance
Students
Test scores
U.S.A
title The Promise and Pitfalls of Using Imprecise School Accountability Measures
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-09T01%3A52%3A20IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-jstor_proqu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=The%20Promise%20and%20Pitfalls%20of%20Using%20Imprecise%20School%20Accountability%20Measures&rft.jtitle=The%20Journal%20of%20economic%20perspectives&rft.au=Kane,%20Thomas%20J.&rft.date=2002-10-01&rft.volume=16&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=91&rft.epage=114&rft.pages=91-114&rft.issn=0895-3309&rft.eissn=1944-7965&rft_id=info:doi/10.1257/089533002320950993&rft_dat=%3Cjstor_proqu%3E3216916%3C/jstor_proqu%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=212088858&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_jstor_id=3216916&rfr_iscdi=true